What the hell? When did I say we should diminish what LT did? He is a hall of fame running back. Would he have been successful if stuck on a crap team? How would I know?

Also I don't know why you're bring ridiculous comparisons of Jerry Rice and Ken Stabler into this. Has nothing to do with the given MVP debate.

Adrian Peterson is CARRYING the Minnesota Vikings on his back. That is exceptionally rare for a running back to do. I don't give a flying frag grenade about how many touch downs he does or doesn't have. I don't care if he breaks record or gets in the playoffs. For a running back to carry a team to within an ear shot of the playoffs is insanely impressive and to me he is without question the most valuable player.

You're welcome to disagree and give your own opinion but personally, that's mine.

In a couple of posts you were implying what Adrian Peterson is doing is more impressive in part because he plays on a roster that isn't as impressive as San Diego's was during Tomlinson's 2006 season. Your words:

Quote:

That's fine, I just think with a superior offense, defense and a quarterback who doesn't suck Peterson would have likely scored more touchdowns.

And I don't really put much weight on TD's for running backs. A running back gets his team in position to help score points, even if he doesn't score them himself. That's why the yardage is so important. Sure he might not be converting the TD's himself, but there are any number of reasons for that.

And 28 touchdowns was a huge fluke. LT never even came close to that mark again. Getting those many touch downs is more a matter of circumstance than skill.

Which is why I brought up the likes of other players. Maybe even John Elway and a Joe Montana comparison is warranted. Doesn't matter if it's MVP, it could be All Pro as well. Or career. If you want to talk MVP and guys carrying teams on their back, then Tom Brady should have been league MVP over Shaun Alexander in 2005 because that Patriots defense wasn't very good that year and he was throwing to the likes of David Patten and Deion Branch. Or maybe he should have been 1st team all Pro instead of Peyton Manning that year who played with Harrison, Clark, Wayne, and James and had a stellar defense that year.

You are entitled to your opinion, that's fine. And Peterson is carrying his team this year. I'm just saying, when comparing it to Tomlinson's 2006 season, we shouldn't play the "well he played on a good team card/that amount of touchdowns was a fluke". He still had to make the proper cuts to elude defenders that year, break tackles, catch well, and will his way across the goal line 28 times. He had a better team sure, but so have a lot of other players in the history of the NFL and they haven't done something like what he did that year.

I've never once discredited Tomlinson by saying he wasn't good. He is a hall of fame running back and an amazing running back at that. You're just drawing conclusions from things I never said.

It's silly to try to compare what Jerry Rice did as a wide receiver to what Adrian Peterson has done as a running back. It's further more irrelevant because your argument had nothing to do with what we are talking about, which is why Adrian Peterson should be MVP.

Of course Tomlinson had to make those cuts, break tackles and catch well. But if he was that damn good, why not every year? Heck there are better backs than Tomlinson all-time too, why weren't they scoring 28 touch downs a year? As I said, it's just as much circumstance as it is a result of great play by a great player. I called that a fluke, which is true, because he never came close to that mark again - as have few running backs before or after. That doesn't make it any less spectacular but it's silly to try to compare this one insane year that has never since been matched by LT or any other RB for that matter to this year.

My point has been all along to give my opinion on why Peterson should be the MVP this year. I could give a crap less about what happened several years ago. It's irrelevant, just as your comparisons are you've attempted to make. As are this random homer Bronco fan who's trying to silently support Peyton Manning without actually saying it.

I could careless. To me, Adrian Peterson is by far the most valuable player to his team. That's all that matters to me. If you want to argue why Brady is more valuable or why Manning is, that's fine. This is the point of this thread. However, if you want to argue when LT was more valuable then to Adrian Peterson is completely frivolous to this debate.

I've never once discredited Tomlinson by saying he wasn't good. He is a hall of fame running back and an amazing running back at that. You're just drawing conclusions from things I never said.

And I never said you discredited Tomlinson by saying he wasn't good. This is the second time you've made such a comment yet I haven't even implied that anywhere. I'm talking about comparing Tomlinson's 2006 season to Adrian Peterson and putting Peterson up on a higher pedestal by using the argument of "well he played on a worse team therefore I feel his campaign this season is more impressive/yards are more important than touchdowns/etc."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Forenci

It's silly to try to compare what Jerry Rice did as a wide receiver to what Adrian Peterson has done as a running back. It's further more irrelevant because your argument had nothing to do with what we are talking about, which is why Adrian Peterson should be MVP.

I wasn't comparing Jerry Rice to Adrian Peterson. I'm saying that like Tomlinson, we shouldn't downplay someone's success because they played on a talented team and had a good supporting cast compared to someone that is also having a fantastic season, but might not be playing on a talented roster. Just because we're talking about Adrian Peterson being MVP, doesn't mean I can't utilize the logic you're using to why his season is more impressive than Tomlinson's 2006 year to you, and use other examples of players in similar situations as to why I believe your reasoning isn't necessarily the right approach to prove a point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Forenci

Of course Tomlinson had to make those cuts, break tackles and catch well. But if he was that damn good, why not every year? Heck there are better backs than Tomlinson all-time too, why weren't they scoring 28 touch downs a year? As I said, it's just as much circumstance as it is a result of great play by a great player. I called that a fluke, which is true, because he never came close to that mark again - as have few running backs before or after. That doesn't make it any less spectacular but it's silly to try to compare this one insane year that has never since been matched by LT or any other RB for that matter to this year.

So what is your point then? That Tomlinson got lucky that year and his 2006 season was overrated? Why doesn't Tom Brady throw 50 touchdowns every year either? Or Peyton Manning? Were those "fluke" years, as in fraudulent performances? I could use the same rhetoric for Peterson and say that if he is so great, why didn't he play better than he's playing now when he had better teams? Why didn't he have a similar YPC earlier in his career? The reasoning is simple. He's having a career season, just like Tomlinson did back in 2006 or Marshall Faulk had in 2000.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Forenci

My point has been all along to give my opinion on why Peterson should be the MVP this year. I could give a crap less about what happened several years ago. It's irrelevant, just as your comparisons are you've attempted to make. As are this random homer Bronco fan who's trying to silently support Peyton Manning without actually saying it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Forenci

I could careless. To me, Adrian Peterson is by far the most valuable player to his team. That's all that matters to me. If you want to argue why Brady is more valuable or why Manning is, that's fine. This is the point of this thread. However, if you want to argue when LT was more valuable then to Adrian Peterson is completely frivolous to this debate.

Well, I merely joined the conversation when comparisons to Tomlinson's 2006 season and Peterson's 2012 season were being made according to a certain logic. Actually you responded to me first. I never once implied that Peterson shouldn't be MVP this year.

I don't know how can anybody make a case for the Mannings or Bradys of the world at this point. Granted, they're having very good seasons and most likely will battle for the Super Bowl, but we see those performances out of QB's every single year. Every year theres a 4500 yard passer with 30plus TD's, they're not having an all-time great season.

Right now there are at least four guys on the verge of eclipsing all-time great records for their positions. Adrian Peterson is aiming for the 2103 yards on the ground, Calvin Johnson for the 1848 receiving, and both Aldon Smith and JJ Watt can break the sack record of 22.5. If that kind of an individual performance isnt enough to get you the MVP and the voters just givit it to a QB again, I will just stop caring about the award.

Having said that my vote would go to JJ Watt, the guy is just flat out DOMINANT at every and any position you place him. The guy is a threat against the pass and run on every single down, that's why I give him the edge over Aldon Smith whos not nearly as dominant against the run.

I also think hes playing a much more tougher position to shine (for the casual or fantasy football fan) compared to Adrian Peterson and he has still managed to open eyes and draw attention on every play.

The guy is just amazing, unstoppable force. I think the performance on sunday when AD and JJ go head to head will determine who gets the award. Get your popcorn ready.

I don't know how can anybody make a case for the Mannings or Bradys of the world at this point. Granted, they're having very good seasons and most likely will battle for the Super Bowl, but we see those performances out of QB's every single year. Every year theres a 4500 yard passer with 30plus TD's, they're not having an all-time great season.

Right now there are at least four guys on the verge of eclipsing all-time great records for their positions. Adrian Peterson is aiming for the 2103 yards on the ground, Calvin Johnson for the 1848 receiving, and both Aldon Smith and JJ Watt can break the sack record of 22.5. If that kind of an individual performance isnt enough to get you the MVP and the voters just givit it to a QB again, I will just stop caring about the award.

Having said that my vote would go to JJ Watt, the guy is just flat out DOMINANT at every and any position you place him. The guy is a threat against the pass and run on every single down, that's why I give him the edge over Aldon Smith whos not nearly as dominant against the run.

I also think hes playing a much more tougher position to shine (for the casual or fantasy football fan) compared to Adrian Peterson and he has still managed to open eyes and draw attention on every play.

The guy is just amazing, unstoppable force. I think the performance on sunday when AD and JJ go head to head will determine who gets the award. Get your popcorn ready.

Because the award isn't given to the guy with the most impressive numbers, or the most dominating at their position, or the most impressive feat, it is given to the most valuable player. The biggest question about this award is what do people think true value is?

I have stated ad nauseum in this thread that I believe the QB position holds more value than any other. However, I have also stated that if Peterson can bring the Vikings to the playoffs then he shuold get the award because he has more to do with the Vikings' success than their QB. However yards, TDs etc aren't valuable to the team if they don't win enough games. The top teams all have good to great QBs, that is not a coincidence.

Here's how I determine value;

You are starting an expansion team and you are offered what Manning, Brady, Rodgers etc have done this year, what Peterson has done this year, what Johnson has done, what Watt has done, Smith, Miller etc etc then who would you take? Now I could be wrong, but I would believe that the majority of people would go with one of the QBs. Because the QB position has more value!

What Peterson has done this year is historical, however I don't believe he gives any random team a better chance of winning than Tom Brady or Peyton Manning or Aaron Rodgers. That's just my take on it. People disagree and that's fine. If people believe Peterson is more valuable than one of the top QBs (using whatever criteria they wish) then who am I to say they are wrong, however people who say Peterson should win because he is the best, most dominant player, to me aren't grasping the nature of this award. It isn't for the best player, that's what offensive and defensive player of the year are for, it is for the most valuable player

Because the award isn't given to the guy with the most impressive numbers, or the most dominating at their position, or the most impressive feat, it is given to the most valuable player. The biggest question about this award is what do people think true value is?

I have stated ad nauseum in this thread that I believe the QB position holds more value than any other. However, I have also stated that if Peterson can bring the Vikings to the playoffs then he shuold get the award because he has more to do with the Vikings' success than their QB. However yards, TDs etc aren't valuable to the team if they don't win enough games. The top teams all have good to great QBs, that is not a coincidence.

Here's how I determine value;

You are starting an expansion team and you are offered what Manning, Brady, Rodgers etc have done this year, what Peterson has done this year, what Johnson has done, what Watt has done, Smith, Miller etc etc then who would you take? Now I could be wrong, but I would believe that the majority of people would go with one of the QBs. Because the QB position has more value!

What Peterson has done this year is historical, however I don't believe he gives any random team a better chance of winning than Tom Brady or Peyton Manning or Aaron Rodgers. That's just my take on it. People disagree and that's fine. If people believe Peterson is more valuable than one of the top QBs (using whatever criteria they wish) then who am I to say they are wrong, however people who say Peterson should win because he is the best, most dominant player, to me aren't grasping the nature of this award. It isn't for the best player, that's what offensive and defensive player of the year are for, it is for the most valuable player

Yeah, totally understand your point. I just think it's unfair to give the award to someone who's having a pedestrian year (for the standards of the QB position) rather than to give it to a guy who's having an all-time great season.

Yeah, totally understand your point. I just think it's unfair to give the award to someone who's having a pedestrian year (for the standards of the QB position) rather than to give it to a guy who's having an all-time great season.

I'm not sure I would say some of the top QBs are having pedestrian years. Sure no one is having 45+ TD years, however I think we are still seeing some very good play by QBs.

I do think it is a flaw in the way the award is worded because the best and most dominant player in the league could very well be an offensive lineman for example, however no matter what those guys do it won't be recognised.

Regardless of who the award goes to people will point to quantative stats to make their argument. Is it fairer to give it to a RB because he had statistically an amazing year, even though hypothetically the best player may play a position which doesn't register stats in the box score?

I have no issue with saying that this year Adrian Peterson has been the best player in the NFL. I believe he has been and the only player close enough to challenge him is JJ Watt. However, if the award was for guys who are the best players then it doesn't make sense that on numerous occassions the MVP has not won either offensive or defensive player of the year.

This brings up another question. How can we decide who the most valuable player is? There is no set criteria to vote, everything isn't equal. Does a guy who adds 5 wins to his team's total mean he is more valuable than a guy who adds 3? Even if one guy turns his team from 1 win to 6 while the other turns his team from 8 wins to 11 and thus a playoff spot? If people really want to get into semantics, technically a guy who adds a few wins on to a bad team's record actually may be doing more harm than good. More wins means a lower draft choice which in turn lowers the possibility of finding difference makers. And if you don't make the playoffs then it was all for nothing.

Now I think that is delving too deep into this, however I don't understand how someone who can turn a bad team into a mediocre one can be viewed as comfortably more valuable than someone who turns a good team into a great one

Now I think that is delving too deep into this, however I don't understand how someone who can turn a bad team into a mediocre one can be viewed as comfortably more valuable than someone who turns a good team into a great one

The issue is with the vague wording. As you just stated "valuable" is a very ambiguous concept. From what I understand the award is supposed to go to the BEST player regardless of position, they just tried to give it a fancy name.

The issue is with the vague wording. As you just stated "valuable" is a very ambiguous concept. From what I understand the award is supposed to go to the BEST player regardless of position, they just tried to give it a fancy name.

Wouldn't the best player be OPOY or DPOY?

__________________
BK

Quote:

Originally Posted by AcheTen

JPP is a better and more productive player than Brandon Graham

Quote:

Originally Posted by abaddon41_80

Is Shaun Hill a top 10 QB? Definitely not. Is he a top 20 one? Almost certainly.

The reward shouldn't strictly go to the best quarterback of each given year, because that's ******* stupid.

It's most valuable...it just sucks for other positions that QB is the most valuable position. It's why QBs are the most highly paid players. It's why good QB prospects are pushed up draft boards and it's why great QB prospects make teams give up shitloads of draft picks to trade up for them.

Really the only positions taken atop the draft are QB, OT and DE

QB because it is the most valuable position
OT to protect the most valuable position
DE to hit the most valuable position

***** at how the award is named and/or viewed, but when people talk about most valuable it pretty much always will be a QB. That's just how the NFL is now

I'll take the guy single handedly taking his team into playoff contention with one of the greatest seasons of all time, and potentially the most dominant ten game stretch of all time, if he breaks 2k. You can have Brady or Manning in like their fifth best personal seasons taking an already good team to SB contention. If AD doesnt win this year, no non-QB will ever win it.